Tinkom v. Purdy
5 Johns. 345
This text of 5 Johns. 345 (Tinkom v. Purdy) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Tinkom v. Purdy, 5 Johns. 345 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1810).
Opinion
The adjournment of the sale to a different place, was a matter of discretion with the constable ; and the question must always be, whether this discretion has been abused. These is no charge of fraud or abuse in the present case ; and the constable could not, therefore, be liable as a trespasser. The judgment below must be reversed.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Noland v. Barrett
26 S.W. 692 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1894)
Reynolds v. Hoxsie
6 R.I. 463 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1860)
Richards v. Holmes
59 U.S. 143 (Supreme Court, 1856)
Sherry v. Doe e. d. Lockwood
1 Smith & H. 289 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1849)
M'Donald v. Neilson
2 Cow. 139 (Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors, 1823)
Alexander v. Gibson
10 S.C.L. 480 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1819)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
5 Johns. 345, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tinkom-v-purdy-nysupct-1810.